Eloy
Gold Member
- Thread starter
- #81
Sure it is. It's simpler to read than your posts. Sorry.Eloy, et al,
Well, Yes you can read simple English; but, this is not simple English.
(COMMENT)I can read simple English. Resolution 242 is quite clear about the need for Israel to remove all its troops from the occupied territories.
Yes I have questions:
• Is the Resolution Binding?You will notice that in 1(ii) it does specific "ALL" --- as in "ALL claims or states of belligerency."
• Did the Resolution as "ALL" forces?
• Did it say "ALL" territory occupied?
You are making assumptions not substantiated by the facts.
One big assumption is that you assume the purpose of the Resolution is that the Arab League Forces and participating nation would be allowed to replay the down without any penalty for provoking the flash conflict. The Arab League was caught by surprise when, after being decisively defeated, that they were not just given back territory lost.
In fact, even today, while:
The reason is quite simple, the Arab League has come to realize that the West Bank and Gaza Strip represent and parasitic and economic albatross; as well as a internal security threat.
• Israel and Egypt are at peace, the treaty does not relinquish back the Military Governorship of Gaza. Even if the Israelis were to withdraw from Gaza, which it has, it should have been placed under Egyptian Military Rule as it was when it was originally occupied by the Israelis.
• Israel and Jordan are at peace, the treaty does not relinquish the territory back to sovereign Jordanian control.
• ≈ 70% of the refugees living in UNRWA camps owned their own homes,
• Those who didn’t own their own homes:
• Pay no rent,
• Pay no municipal taxes,
• Pay no for no utilities
Free access to water and sanitation services.
There is a lot more to the issue that is normally considered. It is like an iceberg, four-fifths below the surface.
Most Respectfully,
R